his master d Iob 31. 13 14. It fights with that common honour both master and servant are equally estated in by creation e Vers 15. Did not hee that made the master in the wombe make him And did not one fashion them in the wombe It fights with the eternall Law in the fifth Commandement in which the master of the servant is required that he be to his servant in his manners a brother in his office a father f 2 King 5. 13. things incompatible to bruite beasts and man Command 5. 2 King 5. Thirdly and howsoever the condition of a slave was harder than that of an ordinary servant or one hired yet our question hath been all this while of Iewish servants and so of Christian servants now the Iew in service might not bee used as a slave or bond-servant but as an hired servant as in Levit. 25. 39 40. The Iew that was a servant was still a brother in Religion and so to be used in his service and labour not so the oxe Fourthly for the duty of subjects to their superiours to cleare the whole matter these grounds I lay downe First subjects are bound to obey their superiours onely in those things in which themselves are subjected to their superiors in which the superiors themselves are not contrary respect guiltinesse hath somewhat of good in it and is of God and in this regard God can separate guilt from sinne But partly it followeth sinne as that which floweth from out of sinne and is the desert and merit of punishment and so it participates of the nature of sinne and is quid vitiosum a thing vitious and in this respect it cannot bee separated from sinne This double consideration of guiltinesse is intimated in Rom. 1. 32. We know the judgement of God that they which commit such things are worthy of death This is the nature of guiltinesse but the forme of sinne can no way bee separated from sinne and yet the sinne be sinne that were a contradiction The forme of sinne is in no respect good that were likewise a contradiction Thirdly besides this you say first there are two things in every sinne the act and guilt as the matter and forme yet in the same breath you tell of three things in every sin the Act the Anomy or unlawfulnesse and the Guilt This for the application of your Schoole-termes Fourthly hence you say it appeareth manifestly that his is the guiltinesse whose the transgression is and his the transgression to whom the law was prescribed as a Rule and that is the masters c. what coherence is here because guiltinesse is in your stile the forme of sinne therefore his is the guiltinesse whose is the transgression Is guiltinesse and transgression all one and is not transgression the forme of sinne This is then in your owne sense as much as to say his is the sinne whose is the sinne A faire conclusion but no marvaile you were thus puzled here for your reasoning should thus have runne from your owne grounds The Act wherewith the commandement of the Sabbath is violated is the servants therefore the guilt is the servants for whoso violates the Law hee is guilty and thus not only the master that commands the worke but the servant that doth the work violating the command of God is guilty What followeth in this section of yours hath been partly answered already and followeth to bee answered below in its more proper place CHAP. IX Breerwood Pag. 12 13. But you will reply perhaps that the comandement touching servants rest on the Sabaoth is given to their Masters indeede but not only to them but to their servants also No such matter for if it be let that appeare and set downe the clause wherein it is manifestly expressed or necessarily implied that servants are forbidden all labour on the Sabaoth day as servants I say touching matter of service or labour imposed on them by their Masters for that in those workes which servants doe on the Sabaoth day of themselves and not as proceeding from their Masters injunction but from their owne election it is no question but they transgresse the commandement but those workes they doe not as servants that is at anothers command but as in the condition of their service or favour of their Masters they retaine some degree of liberty and have some disposition of themselves permitted unto them so in that respect fall into the clause of free men viz. the first clause of the commandement Thou shalt doe no worke but to servants as servants in case they bee commanded to worke which is our question there is no clause of the commandement imposed Answer First this indeed is our just exception against your doctrine that the commandement though given chiefely to masters in those words of specification authorising and appointing them not onely to cease their labour by themselves or any under them but to cause them to cease and to cause them to sanctifie the day for outward conformity yet is given also to and imposed on sonne and daughter man and maide and when you aske for the expresse or implied precept reaching them as servants you have the same expressely in that clause thy servant shall not worke and in that other Thou shalt doe no worke as hath been hitherto abundantly and unanswerably prooved and is of plaine light to manifest it selfe Therefore when you call the first clause of the comandement thou shalt doe no worke the clause of freemen thereby implying that the latter is of bondmen ding the losse of things according to that in Deut. 22. Thou shalt bring home thy brothers erring oxe and therefore a corporall worke pertaining to preserve the health of ones owne body doth not violate the Sabbath as to eate and such like whereby the health of the body is preserved So the Iewes fought Macchab. 2. Elias travelled fleeing from Iezabel and the Disciples pluckt the eares of Corne on the Sabbath c. This Schooleman saith that the bodily workes whereby man serveth man of all other bodily labours are forbidden this day and to the other the servant as well as the freeman is bound freely to apply himselfe And that these workes of servants doe contrary the observance of the Sabbath and hinder the application of the man that serves to divine things CHAP. X. Breerwood Pag. 13 14. WHereby may easily and clearely bee discerned the difference betwixt the equity and wisdome of Almighty God in the constitution of the Law of the Sabaoth obliging Parents and Masters and owners for the children and servants and cattell that are merely under their powers and the rashnesse and iniquity of wretched men interpreting the law as immediatly and directly obliging the children and servants themselves for good Sir consider it well and tell me whether it be more equall to impose the law of ceasing from worke to the servants themselves or to their masters in whose power they are Servants are not homines
place Prove all things hold fast that which is good 1 Thes 5. 21. Ill applyed to try that reasoning that blots out one precept of the Decalogue Oppose that Text Whosoever therefore shall breake one of these least Commandements and shall teach men so hee shall be called the least in the Kingdome of Heaven but whosoever shall doe and teach them the same shall bee called great in the Kingdome of Heaven Matth. 5. 19. The second place For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodnesse and righteousnesse and truth proving what is acceptable to the Lord. Ephes 5. 9 10. Ill applyed against the worke of the Spirit in Christians and the intent of the Lord. See those Texts I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall bee my people Ierem. 31. 33. Heb. 8. 11. The Lord is well-pleased for his righteousnesse sake he will magnifie the Law and make it honourable Esay 42. 21. The third place Holy Father Sanctifie them through thy truth Thy Word is truth Ioh. 17. 17. Ill applied against the great things of the Law written by Gods owne finger Looke to that Text I have written to him the great things of my Law but they were counted as a strange thing Hos 8. 12. Thirdly now for the matter controverted this learned Treatise hath in it the occasion and the substance We take the last first that all may the better judge of every passage onely out of the first part viz. the occasion thereof The Case of Conscience questioned must be proposed to cleare the words of the whole Discourse that the force of the arguments against it in this Treatise may bee seene and the blunting of their edge if they have any or the unsheathing of them that all may see they are but woodden Daggers may be apparant to eveâ—y understanding The Author of this Treatise states it thus and so opposeth it as untruth Breerwood Pag. 3. THat for a servant to do light businesses or any other worke on the Sabaoth day although it were such worke as might lawfully be done on another day and although he did it not of his owne disposition but only in obedience to his masters command yet was a sinne and transgression of Gods Commandement touching the Sabaoth and that he was not bound to yeeld nay that he sinned against God in yeelding obedience to every such commandement of his masters that day which by the precept of Almighty God was wholly precisely consecrated to rest and the service of God This is the point oppugned by our Adversary whose reasons shall be delivered in his owne words and confuted I will neither adde nor diminish but onely cut it into parts that every part may receive its answer apart This prefaced I proceed CHAP. I. Breerwood Pag. 4. l. 29. YOu are a teacher of Gods word within the compasse of that word I will stay with you and by it examine with your patience whether this frame of your Doctrine bee grounded on the rock or on the sand on the firme rock of Gods Law or on the fickle sand of your own fantasie misunderstanding the Law and so whether it tend to the edification or ruine of the Church For touching the commandement of the Sabaoth vpon which I averre this Doctrine of yours cannot bee grounded lay it before you and consider it well and tell me to whom is the charge of servants ceasing from worke on the Sabaoth day given Is it to the servants themselves or to their masters It is given of servants I confesse their worke is the matter of the Commandement But I demand whether it be given and imposed to the servants themselves or to the masters whose servants they are For if the Commandement bee not given to them then doe they not transgresse the Commandements if by their masters they bee set to worke but the masters to whom the Law was given that the servant should not worke and consequently the sinne is their masters and not theirs so if the Law be not imposed to them then it requireth no obedience of them it obligeth them not therefore is neither the transgression of it any sinne to them but only to those to whom it was given as a Law Answer First the Commandement is given to servants also the Words are Thou nor thy servant which referred to the former Thou shalt doe no manner of worke can have no other sense than this thou shalt doe no manner of worke that art the master nor thy seruant shall do no manner of worke a Father and sonne sonne and daughter bond and free were bound religiously to observe it Doct. Slater in the Ministers portion pag. 95. the Commandement of ceasing from worke not giuen of him onely but to him also For how know you that the commandement is given to the master but because the Lord saith thou meaning that hast a servant shalt doe no manner of worke And can you bee so purblind as not to see the Commandement is given aswell to the servant when it is thus delivered in the same forme Thy servant shall doe no manner of worke Nay consider you the Publisher for as for the Author hee knoweth already by the issue whether his collection hence were sound or no and if he might have the favour the Saints had that aroseat our Saviours resurrection Iam perswaded hee would judge this Treatise to the fire and therefore you the Publisher I say and all yee that feare God and know that a bored eare is the best Sacrifice consider The Commandement is given to the servant as a servant and as thy servant I will not worke maiest thou say but my servant shall his worke is mine by Covenant The Lord with whom there is neither bond nor free interposeth and saith not thou shalt not command him to worke but thus thy servant shall not worke What is this but to say as servant and as thine hee shall not worke As if hee said at other times his worke is thine but now his worke is mine thy covenant shall not infringe his covenant with his God As thy servant he is not thine in thy workes or servile workes that day but the Lords freeman yet thy servant that day by thee to be injoyned to the Lords worke Gods servant to be free from thy works Thou must observe the Commandement in thine owne person and preserve it in the persons under thy charge thy servant must doe no manner of thy servile worke that day but must bee thy servant to bee ordered for the Lords worke Consider it well and see the matter forbidden is the servile cares and labors of the houshold both of masters about servants and of Servants towards their Masters Secondly and seeing we are afforded by your good leave to consider the Commandement let us with your patience for I cannot but thinke the heart of any deceiving or deceived is not onely stumbled but convinced by
Sabbath day And the whole reason applied to the Sabbaths rest for servants sounds no lesse than this Remember when thou wast in Egypt the Egyptians made thee a slave and mard the Sabbath day now I have set thee free thou shalt free thy servant that day and make the Sabbath day Moses reasons are evidently directed to the masters not to the servants therefore the servant working at the masters command sinneth not What reasoning is this the master is by arguments peâ—swaded to make a day of rest therefore the servant must worke if the master bid him or therefore hee is not commanded to make a holy rest to his servant Who as touching bodily labour are meerely subject to their masters power This meerely in this place must needes exclude Gods power over the servant that he may not lawfully command him in any thing that respects the use of bodily labour but onely his master which wicked ground laid it will follow that the Lord may not command the master to let his servant rest but onely intreat or perswade but the Lord speakes pro imperio as a Lord and Emperor thy servant shall rest This meerely takes in all time so that the master may require their worke and not allow them any time for solemne worship now it is certaine that no man hath power to sell himselfe to any in such a manner no more than he hath to sell himselfe from God and to the divell for take away time from solemne worship and that falls to the ground nothing can bee done in an instant take away solemne worship and you are without God Ier. 10. 25 and without him under the power of Satan Act. 26. 18. This meerely in a word taketh away all bounds maketh the servants bondage and the masters power infinite Now Plato saith well l Servitus libertas infinita nullisque cancellis circumscripta summum est malum quod si modo quodaÌ„modo definiatur summum bonum Optimo illa modo constat servitus quae Deo paret Plat. tom 3. Epist 8. Servitude and liberty that is infinite and circumscribed with nolimitte is the chiefest evill but if some way it be defined by measure it is a chief good that servitude stands in the best forme which obeyeth God And Doct. Ames m Ames de conscientia lib. 5. c. 23. worthily in his Cases of Conscience it is the generall office of masters neither to exercise nor to imagine it is permitted them any absolute empire over their servants but a limited dominion the account whereof they must render to God as the common master of themselves and their servants Ephes 6. 9. Col. 4. 1. CHAP. VI. Breerwood Pag 11. OR if notwithstanding all these evidences you will still contend that the prohibition touching bodily labour on the Sabaoth is directly imposed on the servants themselves see whether you bring not the Oxe and the Asse and other cattle also under the obligation of this commandement whose worke is immediatly after that of servants prohibited and precisely under the same forme of words whose labours yet on the Sabaoth I hope you will not say to be in them sins and transgressions of Gods law Answer First No we doe not it is imposed on servants yet not on oxe or asse for the servant is forbidden labour because hee can labour without thee and so hee is capable properly of commandement to rest but the Oxe is not forbidden labour but to bee laboured and wrought for hee cannot worke without thee and is not capable of the commandement The servant is therefore forbidden labour even in his masters worke that hee might bee vacant to holy duties n Otio non otioso Zanch. in 4. praecep not so the Oxe The servant is forbidden to bee wrought by his master because now hee must acknowledge another master in whose service he is this day commanded to worke with whom there is no respect of persons and this end the servants obedience to his masters unlawfull commandement of worke that day would crosse no man can serve two masters Moreover doth God take care for Oxen No doubt it was written for the servants sake that he might not attend to guide the Oxes labour and that mercy due to the Oxe might call for more to man Zanchy is expresse that the commandement was given to the servant hee saith o Neminem vult excludi a sanctificatione Sabbati quia tam servi quam domini tam silii quà m parentes tam advenae quám indigenae obstricti Deo sunt natique â—d ejâ—s cultum De jumentis alia est ratio non enim jubentur quiâ—scere à laboribus ut possint vacare cultui divino sicut homines Id. ibid. God would have no man excluded from the sanctification of the Sabbath because aswell servants as masters sonnes as parents strangers as home-borne are bound to God and borne to his worship touching beasts there is another reason c. Secondly the Oxe is forbidden to bee wrought that they might have no snare to draw them to worke and may a servant worke at his masters command how great a snare would this bee to the master who naturally and such a master as will require his servant to worke on that day is not far from his pure naturals loveth profit more than his soule and feares a penny losse where he thinks it might bee gained more than the breach of a precept that God threatens with the curse and hell Hee will bee ready not onely to say with Rebecca p Gen. 27. 13. On me be the curse my sonne only doe as Ibid but in another tone Sirrah the sinne and curse is mine go you about your worke you shall not answer for my faults how comes on you this new religion now therefore I conclude against you thus he that forbade the strangers worke and the cattels that all examples and occasions might be remooved that might entise to evill it cannot bee that hee would leave sonne daughter man and maid in the family free to the master that they should and must obey him in his unlawfull commands Thirdly and to requite you out of the Text. In the same forme of words that the Oxe and Asse is prohibited the stranger within the gate of another is also forbidden work and is it not given to the stranger q It is partly understood of the strangers within the Covenant those saith Zanchy without controversie were commanded so to sanctifie the Sabbath even as other Iewes Zanch. in â— praecep aswell as of yet I hope you wil not say it is given to the oxe If you say it is not given to the stranger I vrge you thus The stranger is there meant partly of the stranger which being a Iew is with thee for the time as a guest r Dr. Williams of the Church l. 2 c. 8. and can this that he is a guest free him from the bond of this Law or if the Iew within whose
was manifestly intended to bring servants release and remission of their weekely toile should by the decree of the law it selfe above all other daies breede their greatest perplexities forasmuch as above all other daies if their Masters be not men that feare God enforced they are there is no avoidance to venter either on sinne or stripes for either God must be disobeyed and sinne cleaveth to their soules or their Masters and stripes light upon their bodies either they must obey God and be plagued by men or obey men and be condemned by God you will say it is better to obey God than men and worse to disobey him that can cast both body and soule into hell than him that can only for a time afflict the body true who doubts it But that is not the point I stand upon the point is how it agreeth with the tender goodnesse and compassion of Almighty God towards poore servants whose condition is yet honest and lawfull to plunge them into such perplexities as namely to impose on them a commandement which they can neither keepe nor breake without a mischiefe and inconvenience neither keepe as the servants of men nor breake as they are the servants of God neither keepe without sharpe punishment nor breake without heavy sinne all which intanglement of servants and calumniation against both the justice and mercy of God is clearly avoided if the commandement be given as the tenour of it doth simply import to the Masters and not to the servants which I have sufficiently proved both by the evidence of holy scripture so to have beene and by evidence and inforcement of reason that it should be so Answer First here I have to say against both the manner and the maine of your arguing For the manner first you play the Sophister egregiously the question is whether it be given onely to masters and not to servants And you take the rise of your reasoning from hence that the commandement according to our opinion is given to servants only and not to masters and therefore you talke that you might put a glosse upon your reasoning and make the contrary appeare the more foule of the commandement of the servants cessation not touching the master The commandement given to themselves not to their masters This is meere cavilling for who ever thought or dreamt save your selfe much lesse held that the commandement was not given to their masters though it were given to the servants also Againe you seeme to promise the servant liberty but indeed make him the bond-slave to his masters unlawfull commands and while you would free him from blowes of an injurious master you free him if it may bee called freedome from the service of God which is perfect freedome Secondly for the maine of your reason it is thus to give the commandement to servants also is against the goodnesse of God for it casts the servant upon stripes or sinne I answer Doth the commandement cast any upon sinne If it any way provoke or revive sinne it is by accident because a spirituall just and good Law meets with a carnall heart sold under sinne a Rom. 7. 11 12. Sinne taketh occasion by the commandement the commandement doth not cause sinne Had you had Pauls spirit you would have justified the Law and laid load upon the flesh and corrupt nature as out of measure sinfull and have advised all youth to cleanse their wayes by taking heed thereto according to Gods word b Psal 119. 9. and not goe about to fill greene heads with crotchets Yea but if they sinne not but obey stripes attend them and this is against the mercy of God Indeed Is this your stumbling blocke It is then against his goodnesse that Hagar c Gen. 16. 6 9. should returne to her Mistris and submit her selfe It is against his pitty that the Apostle from Gods spirit should require servants to suffer buffetings that come undeserved 1 Pet. 2. 19. It is against goodnesse to be happy for blessed are yee saith Christ when ye suffer despightfull usage for righteousnesse sake d Mat. 5. 11 12. It is against goodnesse that any man should be or doe good inasmuch as some wicked men will persecute a man for that good Why should the pitifull God require that which will cast us on the wheele greediron racke fire and faggot and what not that is of torment and torture Oh divelish earthly and sensuall reasoning This is farre from our Saviours Doctrine and Spirit the King of Sion meeke and having salvation who bids us e Luk. 14. 26 27 take up our crosse daily and hate father and mother and our owne lives as ever we meane to be worthy of him and find life to life eternall Such sufferings are to Gods glory and to our glory Our Saviour premeditating of his sufferings said Father glorifie thy Name that is saith Chrysostome f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in Ioh. 12. 28. Leade me now to the Crosse the Crosse he calleth glory saith Ammonius g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ammonius Glorifie thy sonne that is doe not forbid him now hastening to death assent to thy sonne herein for the profit of all saith Cyrill h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cyril in Ioh. We have an excellent Chapter in Lactantius his Institutions answering this seâ—suall argument upon another occasion for the povertie and afflictions and unjust persecutions of the Church and the prosperity of Idolaters and Heathen might seeme to proove the worship of God to bee vaine and the Rites of gods or idols to be true because their worshippers enjoyed brought Therefore that Starre in the firmament of your reasoning whose condition is yet honest and lawfull shooteth and falleth Yea but you say the point you stand on is not how much better it is to obey God than man but how the command requiring obedience in a thing that will cast us into the hands of wicked men can stand with the goodnesse of God This is the point that all this while I have handled reade and see how Fourthly and for a recompence when you talke so freely of mischiefes and inconveniences free your Doctrine of them if you can For if the servant must obey his masters unlawfull commands of worke on that day I say hee cannot doe it but he falleth into mischiefe for he is sold from Gods service and the Covenant of God p Esay 56. 6. Every one that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it taketh hold of Gods Covenant if a master be wicked and into inconvenience for he hath no breathing time he cannot leave it undone but hee falleth into stripes and sinne at once without any support from God or man Therefore your Conclusion that all is avoided by this your dreame is most untrue neither Scripture nor reason favoureth your opinion and in this you suffer the just reproofe of q 2 Pet. 2. 12. Iude 8. Peter and Iude you are one of the filthy dreamers Lactantius saith
commandement from being a Law of Nature according to your exposition of a thing that hath in it native ilnesse for to make an image setting aside the circumstance to bow to it is no more evil than for a servant to worke setting aside this circumstance on the Sabbath This your slye arguing savours of Popery which hath thrust out the second Commandement as a positive and ceremoniall Law upon the same grounds And when you say that the prohibition of other things is caused by their native illnesse if you meane their illnesse was before the Law not understanding by Law the promulgation thereof but the Law of Nature written in the heart of man inasmuch as this Law is the expresse righteousnesse of God it is a blasphemous Tenet for hereby transgression shall bee where there is no Law and a chiefe evill a summum malum as well as a chiefe good or an absolute goodnesse out of God which this illnesse swerveth from For my part I cannot tell how any thing should bee evill natively but evill because it is defective of good which good perfecting man is the Law of righteousnesse If by prohibition you meane the promulgation of the Law then I say that this maketh not the thing prohibited unlawfull but onely makes the sinne the greater in them that yet offend after God by lively voyce hath renewed those obliterated precepts offuscated with sinne in the heart of man Thirdly the Commandement it selfe in these five things you say is meerely Ceremoniall brought in by positive Law and is not of the Law of Nature first to observe one day in seven secondly to observe a certaine day of that number thirdly to observe the seventh in the ranke fourthly to observe a whole day by the revolution of the Sunne fifthly to observe it with severe exactnesse of restraining all worke This you essay to prove first by a place of Scripture secondly by the example of the Patriarchs and thirdly by the absurditie that else will follow This matter shall bee more largely discussed because it will much cleare the Doctrine of the Sabbath for now you strike at the roote of it and would lay Religion on the ground but your owne staffe will breake your backe which you give by the handle into our hands This you yeeld that the secret instinct of nature hath taught all men even the prophanest Gentiles that some time is to be set apart and dedicated to the solemne worship of God as set times to be spent in sacrifice and devotion Now goe on this instinct is the Law written in their hearts therefore the Sabbath is a Law of Nature But did this instinct of Nature guide them to your former five particulars about the time of worship If it did and that the sheards hereof are found among the Gentiles you cannot nor any other for you conclude unlesse you will play the mad-men with reason that every of them hath lesse than moralitie and perpetuitie in it It is true the Gentiles a thousand wayes depraved the use of the Sabbath by keeping holyday to their Idols saith Aretius y Aret. problem loc 55. de Sabb. obser they also wrested the name to a wanton and ridiculous signification in which notwithstanding there hath remained some footsteps of the ancient originall to which serò tandem Gentes redire debuerunt at length the Gentiles though late ought to returne To omit their depravations see in them the footsteps of every particular First the Gentiles set apart certaine and constant dayes not moveable and wandring Macrobius saith there are foure kinds of publike holydayes Feriarum that is dayes vacant from pleading and labour Stative Conceptive Imperative and nundinative and the Stative are common to all the people on certaine and set dayes and moneths and noted with standing observations in their Calendars Secondly they observed a certaine day of seven and particularly the seventh Hesiod saith z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesiod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the seventh day is a holyday Lampridius telleth of Alexander Severus that on the seventh day when he was in the City he went up to the Capitoll and frequented the Temple Homer saith the seventh day is holy and was the day in which all things were perfected and on which we depart from the bankes of Hell Callimachus saith the like and that it is the birth-day chiefe and perfect a Clemens Alexandr stromat l. 5. Clemens Alexandrinus sheweth b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Alex. l. 5. strom that not onely the Hebrewes but the Greekes also knew the seventh day holy And Eusebius c Euseb de prepar Evang. l. 13. c. 7. affirmeth that almost all as well Philosophers as Poets knew that the seventh day was more sacred And Philo d Philo. lib. 2. de vita Mosis the Iew saith Who doth not honour that sacred day which returneth every weeke The seventh day holydayes were wont to be granted to children in Schooles among them e Lucianus in Pseudo logista Certaine of the Ethnicke Doctors were wont onely to dispute on the Sabbaths f Aul Gell. l. 13. c. 2. Sueton. Lib. 3. Seneca g Senec. ep 95. in his 95. Epistle shewing that exhortations are not enough but wee need obliging precepts yea the decrees of wisedome bee reckoneth up the Sabbath as the festivall day for Religion but condemneth their manner of observing it when he saith Let us forbid any one to light a candle on the Sabbaths for neither doe the gods want light and men themselves are not delighted with smoke he worshippeth God who knoweth him h Macrob. Saturn l. 1. c. 7. Macrobius sheweth that Saturne of whom is the name of Saturday was honoured with Candles lighted at his Altars and wax-Tapers offered on his dayes Aretius hath these words i Aret. problem loc de Sabbathi observ The Greekes and Latines call the Sabbath The day of rest which the Gentiles But before I passe over this point I would take off the exceptions of one Franciscus Gomarus ſ Gomarus de Investigat sententiae originis sabbati cap. 4. pag. 42. a Germane who pleades that these allegations for the seventh dayes celebrity observed among the Gentiles are insufficient and the consequence thence drawne to proove this to have ought of the Law of Nature in it infirme The insufficiency of allegations out of the Poets hee would evince from this that those Poets talke as the proverbe is of Garlike but we speak of Onions and though Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius alledge them yet for this cause they deserve little credit because they speake of the seventh but the Poets only of a seventh I answere that they must needs availe and be of force to any that hath reason for be it they spake not of that seventh from the Creation yet that they speake of the celebrity of a seventh maketh wholly and sufficiently to proove that they were guided to a seventh and if they knew
to be cut off from the Congregation of Israel g Exod. 12. 19. See Junius on the place Now shall the servant be left to the subjection to that command that makes him unfit for communion with the people of God God forbid Yet thus would you provide for servants and be such a sinner against their soules Seventhly how much better might you have tuned to Lyra's Harpe than to runne a new straine he saith thus h Non loquitur de adultis qui jam sciebant legem Sabbati quia prohibiti sunt simul cum parentibus sed hoc additur propueris ignorantibus legem qui non debebant permitti dparentibus aliquid operari in diem Sabbati Lyra. he speaketh not of those of ripe age which did now know the Law of the Sabbath because they are forbidden together with their parents but this is added for childrens sake that knew not the Law which ought not to bee permitted to doe any workes on the Sabbath day This interpretation hee had from Rabbi Solomon I doe not say it is the truth of the place but this I say you have neither truth nor patron for your abortive opinion Let all Christians be warned how they receive every one that pretends Scripture all Heretikes were such according to that of Irenaeuâ— they were evill Expositors of things well spoken i Pravi expositores probè dictorum Iraeneus l. 1. advers Haeres in prooem Satan laid his most dangerous assaults against Christ and would perswade them by Scripture too Behold here one professing to stay within the compasse of the Word and by a futilous distinction of of and to erres from the A. B. C. Such words fiet like a Canker or Gangreene k 2 Tim. 2. 17 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It shall be your wisedome not to serve God by distinctions and to learne Divinitie of your Teachers and not Divisions of Sophisters CHAP. II. Breerwood Pag. 5. 6. FOr the better clearing of which point let me aske you a question or two of other Commandements that for their forme are paralell to this and whereof you have no prejudice God commanded the Israelites that no stranger should eate of the Paschall Lambe againe that no Ammonite nor Moabite should enter into the Congregation of the Lord to the tenth generation Good Sir tell me did the Stranger sinne if he eat of the Passeover being supposed invited or did the Ammonites and Moabites sinne if they came into the Congregation being admitted Did the Stranger I say and the Ammonites and the Moabites in these cases sinne of whom the Commandements were given or the Israelites to whom the Commandements were given touching them no but it is clearely the Lords meaning that the Israelites should not admit of any Gentile to the participation of the Passeover nor receive the Ammonites and Moabites into the Congregation of the Lord. Answer First I reply these Commandements are not paralell and so your ground faileth these Commandements I say this Thy servant shall doe no manner of worke and this No stranger shall eate of the Passeover In the first you acknowledge the masters worke is forbidden to the master whether done by himselfe or by his servant In the latter the Passeover forbidden to the stranger is enjoyned to the Iew. The Iew must eate the Passeover the Iew must not admit the stranger to eate but the master must not worke and must not admit his servant to worke The thing prohibited viz. to doe servile worke on the Sabbath is sinfull in it selfe but the eating of the Passeover which is the thing forbidden the stranger was the speciall worship of God his ordinance and service required of the Iew. Now this makes a wide difference in the sense of those precepts that sound alike for where the thing is evill it cannot but be evill who ever doth it that is capable of the divine precept as the servant is for he is a reasonable creature and was a Iew but where the thing it selfe is holy it becomes evill onely to him that prophaneth and defileth it The Iew is made the observer of the Passeover and the preserver of it from the strangers observation but here the master and servant are both made observers of the command of ceasing from work and the master is to preserve it to the servants observation Besides where the words runne in the same forme the precepts are not presently paralell or the prohibitions for to make them so the parties commanded must stand alike capable of the Law or uncapable Wee 'le not goe farre for instance the words in this precept are every way for forme of words paralell Thy sonne shall doe no manner of worke the stranger within thy gate shall doe no manner of worke yet the forme of the precept is not the same because the sonne of the Iew stood otherwise obliged to the Sabbath as your selfe doe yeeld pag. 25. than the stranger And to put it beyond all exception these for forme of words are paralell Thy sonne shall doe no worke Thy cattell shall doe no worke yet the precept is not paralell because the sonne is capable of Gods Law to obey it properlyâ— and the Soli homines capaces sunt propriae legit Zuarez de leg l. 1. c. 6. cattell are not There is a difference betweene the forme of precepts and the forme of words in which precepts are signified The forme of the precept must partly bee gathered from the subjects to which they have reference and as they are capable or lesse capable of law so the precepts to be understood for the Law in its owne nature carrieth a certaine respect and disposition to them on whom it is imposed m Lex essentialâ—â—er quandam habitudinem ad eos dicâ—â— quibut imponitur Zuarez l. 1. ca. 6. de leg Now for the Law of the Passeover the stranger was not so capable of it as being not under the Law but the servant being a Iew is alike capable of the Law of the fourth Commandement as is his Master because equally under the Law What the Law speaketh it speaketh to them who are under the Law n Rom. 3. 19. saith the Apostle Secondly I affirme that the strangers Moabites and Ammonites did sinne in thus doing though invited or admitted they prophaned holy things as Balthazar did the Bowles of the Temple o Dan. 5. â— Now the Iewes sinfull invitation cannot take away their prophanation It is all one as if a Pagan living among us that refused our Religion and were not baptized should yet come and eate of the Bread of the Lord though some Minister for some by respect should be supposed to invite him There were among the Iewes strangers that kept house and had servants that yet were no Proselytes but onely strangers within the gates these sinned against this precept if they would kill the Passeover and eate it although the sewes should through remissenesse suffer it Further that a stranger
of Plato that because hee talked much of one God that made the world but nothing of Religion and his worship that hee dreamed and knew not God r Somniaverat enim Deum non cognoverat Lact. Instit l. 5. c. 15. How much more doe you dreame and know not God that talke of him to evert his worship CHAP. XIII Breerwood Pag. 17 18 19. ANd doth not the practice of holy governours registred in the Scriptures declare that they had the same understanding of the commandement Nehemiah when he saw among the Jewes at Jerusalem the Sabaoth prophaned with treading of wine-presses carrying of burthens buying and selling whom reproveth hee for it The servants by whose imployment and labour these things were done and the Sabaoth defiled No but them under whose power the servants were the rulers of Iudah and what rulers the Magistrates only No such matter but the freemen of Iudah that is to say the Masters of those Servants for such namely freemen the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there used doth properly import not only the Magistrates or Rulers of the commonwealth for the Septuagint which being themselves Iewes I hold best knew the property of their owne language translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word is properly and directly opposed to servants and every where almost in the old Testament where the hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is found which is knowne to signifie a freeman and is translated in the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is in the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is manifestly known to be the same with the hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but farre more usuall in the Chaldee tongue They were the freemen of Iudah then that by Nehemiah were called to account and reprooved for the prophanation of the Sabaoth by those servilo labours which no question had beene executed by their servants but if the servants by those labours had themselves transgressed the commandement had he not done hoth justly to have made them partakers of the reproofe who had been partakers of the sinne seeing the commandement of God lay equall on both and wisely too that if hee could not restraine the masters from commanding yet hee might restraine the servants from obeying and so have two strings to his bow This Nehemiah did not who understood well the commandement but rebuked the freemen or Masters only and omitted the servants and yet dealt you will not deny I am sure both justly and wisely for had he done more wisely thinke you to rebuke servants for not resting on the Sabaoth that would have rested with al their hearts if they had not beene constrained to worke Or had hee done more justly to exact that of the servants which for ought that appeareth the commandement of God exacted not from them 10. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendred thus by our Translators Blessed art thou O Land when thy King is the sonne of Nobles which in truth cannot be understood of freemen but of men nobly descended and educated All things considered I question much whether in the old Testament there be any thing to force us to understand it at all of freemen as opposed to servants But if it were so that the word had such a signification yet seeing it is neither the onely nor the proper signification of the word it must of necessitie in that place of Nehemiah not be taken in your large sense but in that true and restrained sense for chiefe Rulers and Princes that had authoritie over housholders and others that kept servants CHAP. XIV Breerwood Pag. 18 19. FOr what worke is it that men are forbidden of the Sabaoth Is it not the same that is permitted on the sixe daies their owne worke Thou shalt doe all thy worke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is it the servants work whereabout as a servant he is imployed that neither is undertaken of himselfe nor for himselfe that neither beginneth nor endeth in himself but beginneth in his Masters command and endeth meerely in his Masters profit and from beginning to end is performed in his masters feare It is manifest that in the accompt of God it is not for God beholdeth the heart and that is a mans owne worke with him that proceedeth from his owne will And therefore in Isaiah it is the will Isai 58. 13. that is forbidden about the prophaning of the Sabaoth that which in the law was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thy worke is there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thy will and that most justly for the will it selfe indeede is the proper seat and subject of sin which essentially is nothing else but the inordinate or unruly election or resolution of the will varying from the Scripture or Gods law for this very election of mans will is the proper forme of actuall sin those outward unlawfull actions of ours are but the expressions or manifestations or fruits or effects of sinne sinne properly they are not which hath her residence and inhesion in the soule it selfe and passeth forth of it only the tincture and evidence and name of sinne they carry with them because they issue from a sinfull determination of the will and are no whit further sinfull then they are voluntary Seeing therefore sinne consisteth especially in the exorbitance of the will they that are only ministers of anothers exorbitant will are only ministers of another mans sinne which so farre only becommeth their owne sinne as their owne will concurreth therevnto The servant therefore doing that worke on the Sabaoth day in obedience to his master which of his owne will and election he would not do although the worke whereby the commandement of God is transgressed be in some sort his yet the transgression is none of his but his masters that exacted the worke so that although the worke as naturally considered be the servants yet morally it is the Masters The labour of it is the servants but the sinne of it is the Masters for the sinne is not the servants obedience to the Masters commandement but in the masters disobedience to Gods commandement which hath indeed prohibited the worke of servants in the Sabaoth but yet the prohibition is imposed and directed to their Masters not to them who are onely ministers not authors of their owne labours now in the imputation of sinne difference is to be made betwixt the authors and the ministers Betwixt the principall and instrumentall agents Answer Let the reader remember that you here yeeld that if the commandement be imposed on servants then they sinne in working this day at their masters command Now this hitherto hath been proved and all plainly answered that may seeme to make against it and so I proceed First the worke forbidden is First service which is permitted on the sixe daies Six daies shalt thou serve Secondly servile worke in which and about which the messenger is imployed so the notation of the word in the
commandement which you cite doth properly signifie Thirdly all thy worke as opposed to workes of sanctification that is of piety and mercy properly though they bee not servile worke properly so called or mechanicall as the study and exercise of the Liberall Arts for these concerne naturall and civill things and looke not immediatly to the worship of God nor the unavoidable necessities of man It is apparant then that servile workes or workes of ministry about our callings and so servants worke is in a speciall manner prohibited Now then take your owne argument The worke permitted on the sixe daies is prohibited the seventh the in sense with the middle word with which it is the selfe same in sound If the first then it is opposed to all that dutie of the Sabbath which consists in the immediate honour of God done with the full complacency of hart therein and the honorable mention of it in our words and discourse as is cleare in the Text to him that duly weigheth it Now say Is not the servants conteined in this word thy pleasure as that which is no duty of Gods worship publike or private If the second then it is not al that is forbidden and so your argument fals but rather concernes as many learned and conscionable Divines deliver our works of recreation or sports which we finde out though at other times lawfull which take off the heart from holy duties for God hath found us another recreation chiefely on that day if any will be merry let him sing Psalmes as in Ps 92. The Title compared with the Psalme would have the Sabbaths duties our delight Fourthly Now whereas you lay this for a ground that the election of mans will is the proper forme of actuall sin I wonder how you should so mistake but that Divinity was not your covenanted Wife but only your Concubine which for a turne you use and in the use you ravish Ataxy or irregularity is the proper forme of sinne actuall be the Ataxy in thoughts in desires in deeds or in words Moreover election of the will is an act and good and therefore by no meanes the forme of sinne and if you say you speake not of election but this election namely the unruly and inordinate election tell me is the election or the unrulinesse the forme of sinne unrulinesse doubtlesse which informeth both the election that is sinnefull and the action that is sinfull And whereas you say that outward unlawfull actions are but expressions of sinne and not sinne properly if they bee unlawfull actions they bee sinnefull actions properly so called for you yeelded before according to the truth of Scripture and reason pag. 12. that sinne formally is nothing else but unlawfulnesse unlesse you will say that sinne formally is not sinne properly A proper position For your reason whereby you would maintaine this that sinne hath her residence and inhesion in the soule it selfe and passeth forth of it the actions outward carry onely the tincture of sinne therefore they are not sinne I reply If they carry the tincture of sinne then are they sinnefull Againe are they died with sinne and yet hath sinne no inhesion nor residence in them This is strange and for the residence of sinne it is not in the soule alone a Peccat um est in â—bjecto occasion â—liter in intellectu originaliter in voluntate formaliter in membris quoad usum Saint Paul saith the law of sinne is in our members Rom. 7. 23. and wee know sinne commeth by propagation but the soule is not propagated only the body commeth and is traduced from the parents I would know where in this propagation sinne hath its inhesion and whether an unfitnesse and perversenesse fighting with the rightnesse and aptnesse God approveth bee not traduced and doe not naturally sticke in the very bodily faculties And when you say sinne only consisteth in the exorbitancy of the will it is most false sounder philosophy refelleth this for Aristotle b Arist lib. 3. Ethic. c. 1. excuseth not from a fault the things that are offended in or done amisse against ones will through ignorance and Divinity teacheth that errors in judgement and ignorances c Ignorantia excâ—sat non a toto sed à tanto when it is of things which of dutie wee should know are sinnes that the want of originall righteousnesse and the defects of graces are sinne And Thomas d saith that so is every habit and Act deprived of due order The habit also of sinne is first in the understanding because all sinne commeth from error which is in the understanding consider it also in its absolute act without working with the will so sinne is firstin it Vpon such rotten props what building can bee reared Yet let us take notice of your reasoning for further satisfaction to all and the utter subversion of this new learning It stands thus The minister of another mans sinne being but the minister of anothers exorbitant will no further sinneth than his owne will concurreth thereunto The servant doing his masters worke on the Sabbath not of election but in obedience to his master is but the minister of anothers exorbitant will and his owne will no way concurreth therewith therfore so doing hee sinneth not instrument in the workes of his Master and conferreth also will I answere he conferreth will indeede if hee be a good servant by reason of the obligation of obedience wherein he standeth to his master but yet not absolute but conditionall will not the selfe election but only the obedience an yeelding of his will and th 〈…〉 onely as it is his masters worke not as it is his masters sinne for the worke on the Sabaoth hauing sinne annexed to it and so being a sinnefull worke the servant and the mastster must divide it betwixt them the worke is the servants and the sinne is the masters for the servant doth but his duty in obeying his masters commandemet but the master transgresseth his in disobeying Gods commandement touching his servants ceasing from that labour Answer First why should we feare to say the eye beholding vanitie sinneth and so of the tongue loose to blaspheme slander and lye For first they move irregularly secondly they are the weapons of sin thirdly in them sin is finished to the bringing forth of death both on body and soule fourthly these are the sinnes of both body and soule and not of either apart fifthly the sinne is made greater by the outward acting in respect of the extent thereof it having now invaded the body and not onely possessed the soule so that there is filthinesse of flesh aswell as of the spirit 2 Cor. 7. 1. and in respect of the dammage it bringeth to others either by way of scandall and offence or by some reall discommodity as slaughter defamation with the like sixthly and hence it is that certaine punishments are rightly inflicted for the outward acting of some sinne which never could have place for
the inward sinne alone as divorce is rightly inflicted for the act of adultery that cannot bee so for the intent of it And thus the Scripture chargeth the members of the body eyes full of adultery f 2 Pet 2. 14. the tongue is a world of wickednesse g Iam. 3. 6. Rivers of water run downe mine eyes because they that is mine eyes keepe not thy Law h Psa 119. 136. Your hands are full of blood i Esay 1. â—5 I doubt not but the Scripture speaketh more exactly than you You would bee thought to speake properly when you say These workes are the sinnes of the dissolute mind but neither Philosophy nor Divinitie will admit it for we may not say The will sinneth the body sinneth but thus The man sinneth For actions are spoken and are the acts of the subject persons k Actiones sunt suppositorum it is not a proper speech to say The body sleepeth but The man sleepeth The soule understandeth but The man And the Scripture phrase inclineth more to this The eye sinneth than this the will sinneth For that saying The soule that sinneth shall die Ezek. 18. is meant thus the person or man that sinneth as in that phrase so many soules went downe into Egypt Genes 46. 26. Now from this it followeth that not onely in lying the tongue is abused as the senselesse creature is abused by a sinner but inasmuch as the body and soule are but one man and make one person whose are the aâ—â—ious and works good or bad the body and members thereof have their share in the very sinne in the irregularity filth and guilt of it and so shall find it by the punishment hereafter and doe fine it by the punishment that seazeth on the body here and though the members bee instruments of the soule yet not such as can bee separated from the man for the body and soule are essentiall parts of man Secondly and for objecting first I would retort upon you your owne argument if the naturall instrument that in your opinion sinneth not as the tongue lying lyeth not a sottish speech yet it is charged with sinne in the Scripture it is punished for sinne here and hereafter and is polluted with sinne then how much more is the voluntary instrument charged polluted and shall be punished that cannot worke in evill but must needs bring will to the worke and election too in some sort Thirdly for your objection and solution the objection is this The servant is a voluntary instrument not so the eye or hand in the body therefore from the hand to the servant will not hold You solve and salve it thus The servant conferreth will but thus and thus as a conditionall will a wil obeying not selfe-electing a will to the work not to the sin therefore a naturall instrument and such a voluntary are all one This can never bee made good for by your owne confession such an instrument is in part voluntary and so is not the naturall instrument Besides the maine of your answer lyeth in this that to obey the master in his worke and not in his sinne is lawfull you yeeld then that if it be a sinne no conditionall or halfe-election will serve to free him that so chuseth it from being a sinner I urge not onely the masters commanding of worke that day is sinne but the worke of the master that day is forbidden to be done and so is sinne There the conditionall halfe or under will the obeying will of the servant if he worke will not excuse him from sinne For nothing taketh away voluntarinesse from a deed but absolute violence of compulsion and a meere casualty that could not be foreseene or foreheeded As if one be compelled to bend the knee by force his knee bowed by others before an Idoll or if one kill another by meere chance Deut. 19. 5 6 10. Fourthly for that speech where you say The worke on the Sabbath hath sinne annexed to it it is not right for the worke on the Sabbath is sinne that circumstance of time on the Sabbath is the forme of it And this indeed must bee divided betweene the master and the servant as both their sinnes the masters in commanding the servants in working But to divide sinne from servile worke on the Sabbath that they should not meet in the same person neither master nor servant nor all the oxen in the Gate are able with Cart-ropes to doe I pray you note the worke say you is the servants the sinne is the masters Why the worke is the sinne and is it not the servants then CHAP. XVI Breerwood Pag. 21 to 28. BVt seeing I have begun to object I will proceed a little farther in that course both the more evidently to declare my meaning lest it be obnoxious to calumniation and also to resolve the objections that may bee produced against servants obedience touching worke on the Sabaoth if my imagination be so good as to finde them and my learning also to satisfie them Object For first it seemes that servants are touching this commandement in better condition than other men if by their workes on the Sabaoth they transgresse it not and transgresse it they doe not if it bee not imposed on them but only on their masters Sol. Touching them I answere that the workes of servants are of two sorts some proceeding from them as they are servants that is upon their masters commandement others proceeding from their owne election unto which namely not by any commandement of their Masters but by the way of their owne desires they are carried Of the first sort of workes they are only Ministers of the second they are Authors And touching this second sort I confesse although of the former it bee farre otherwise both that servants have a severall obligation of their owne and that their transgression and sinne is severall and therefore that themselves are bound to answere it to the justice of God but whether the sinne of these second workes be peculiarly the servants or that the Master also participates with the servant in that guiltinesse It may be a question for if they be done meerly by the servants election beside the knowledge and contrary to the commandement of his master it seemes to be particularly the servants sinne But if they bee occasioned by the masters negligence then doth he certainly participate in guiltinesse with his servant although in a diverse sort for it is a sinne of commission in the servant doing an unlawfull act and a sinne of omission in the Master neglecting his due care because by the precept of Almighty God the master is bound not only to command his servant to worke but to command him not to worke on the Sabaoth day well then the workes which servants doe on the Sabaoth day on their owne election are condemned the workes they doe by obedience are excused by their masters commandement but what workes are so excused Are all No but
separation from Gentiles and consecration to God therfore it was meerely ceremoniall and obliged not the Gentiles which it had done if it had beene a Law of Nature First here your consequence is weake and fallacious for every marke and signe of separation from others and consecration to God is not ceremoniall Baptisme is such a marke betweene Persian and Heathens yet no ceremony so is the Sacrament of the Lords supper Such was the Sabbath then and is at this day Neither doth every marke of separation and sanctification oblige only those that have that marke for the duty was no lesse necessary to men before the Law given than after and examples are not wanting of the Majesty of God himselfe g Gen. 2. 2. 7. 4. 8. 10 12. Exod. 16. 6. of Noah and of the Israelites before the Law by whom the dayes were gathered into weekes which sheweth that the observation of the Sabbath was not unknowne Lastly you urge us with an absurditie that will follow on this doctrine that if it bee of Nature to keepe the Sabbath it bindeth us Christians to keepe the seventh day Sabbath and so the first changers of the day to the first day of the weeke sinned grievously This argument is of no consequence for the first day of the weeke is now the Lords Sabbath as the seventh day from the Creation was then And thus neither Law of Nature broken nor sinne incurred and therefore all absurditie avoided the first day of the weeke is also the seventh though not that seventh day This accommodation also of the fourth precept to the Iewes in the determination of the day maketh not the commandement ceremoniall nor yet the change of it to our Lords day no more than the fifth Commandement is made ceremoniall by this promise respecting Israel in Canaan That thy dayes may bee long in the Land which the Lord thy God giveth thee And this change in the application of the precept by the Apostle that it may bee well with thee and that thou mayest live long on earth h Ephes 6. 3. It standing firme then that the Commandement in every part thereof as it is contained in the Decalogue is morall and of the Law of Nature and the breach thereof a sinne your conclusion taketh place against you namely that the servant may not in any case worke on the Sabbath at prohibited workes because it is sinne at the commandement of any master on earth For it is better to obey God than man To the Answer whereof I leave you or others that in pride of spirit and a spirit of contradiction dare to attempt it in your behalfe All that followeth in this part of your Discourse seeing it is but by way of Recapitulation by the former Answers is found to be of no force CHAP. 17. Breerwood Pag. 28 29 30. BVt there is another objection for admit the servants worke upon the Sabaoth be the Masters sinne that imposeth it Is it not sinne to give consent and furtherance to another mans sinne But this servants doe when they execute their Masters commandements and consequently it is unlawfull so to yeeld lawfull therefore it is to resist and reject such commandement I answer first touching the point of consenting that in such a worke is to be considered the substance and the quality that is the worke it selfe and the sinfulnesse of it servants may consent to it as it is their masters worke not as it is their Masters sinne for except these things be distinguished God himselfe can no more avoide the calumniation of being the author than poore servants of being the ministers of sinne for that God concurreth with every man to every action whatsoever as touching the substance of the action is out of all question seeing both all power whence actions issue are derived from him and that no power can proceede into act without his present assistance and operation but yet to the crime the faultinesse the inordination the unlawfullnesse of the action wherein the nature of sinne doth for malice consist hee concurreth not But it wholly proceedeth from the infection of the concupiscence wherewith the faculties of the soule are originally defiled the actions themselves issuing from the powers and the sinfulnesse of the actions from the sinfulnesse of the powers like corrupt streames flowing from filthier springs It is not therefore every concurrence of the servants with the Master to a sinfull action which causeth the staine and imputation of sin upon the servant as when he consenteth and concurreth only to the action not to the sinne namely likes and approves it as his masters worke yet utterly dislikes it as it is his masters transgression likes of the worke for the obligation of obedience wherein touching worke he standeth to serve his Master and yet dislikes of the sinne for the great obligation wherin every one standeth toward the honour of God But yet to answer secondly to the point of resisting the servant ought not for any dislike or detestation of the annexed sinne to resist or reject his masters commandement touching the worke for in obeying hee is at most but the minister of another mans sinne and that as they say per accidens namely as it is annexed to such a worke but in resisting hee is directly the author of his owne sinne by withdrawing his obedience about bodily service from I say for the master doth not sinne onely in commanding his servant to worke but in working him and so bringing his command into execution which thing the servant knowing to be unlawfull must that he may not partake therein not onely not touch it with one of his fingers but also perswade the contrary and modestly rebuke it Again hee ought to attend on holy workes which directly will hinder that unlawfull worke and to these is he bound as Gods servant that day Thirdly by approving and this the servant doth really by his worke and by his example Your second solution is found by this that hath been set downe to be vaine and frivolous the servant must refuse to sinne in any kinde And his refusall in this kinde is not against the Law of nations as we have heretofore shewed nor against his owne covenant for his covenant though without limitations expressed doth not exempt him from the service of his Prince and Country the Prince may presse him to the warres much lesse from the service of his God when his Lord and Saviour presseth him to his warres as he doth in the day of assembling his army in holy beauty It is therefore wicked and injurious to God man nations lawes and covenants that you say that the Servant standeth bound to his master in all bodily service without any exception of the Sabbath more than other dayes Your phrase you use of the Servants resisting is your owne we teach the servant may refuse and must all such workes which God hath forbidden to be done that day but not resist no hee must acknowledge
Saviours ascension Gods people hath alwayes in all ages without any gaine-saying used to come together ken of which was the point of the Apostles doctrine I especially remembred you of That God I say which commanded and that doctrine which instructed servants to disobey their Masters and by depriving them of their service caused their hindrance The Apostle knew full well this was not the way to propagate the Gospell and enlarge the kingdome of Christ he knew it was Christian meekenes and obedience and humility and patience that must doe it and therefore hee commandeth Christian servants to give their masters all honour to obey them in all things and to please them in al things that so their masters seeing them more serviceable and profitable servants and withall more vertuous than others were might sooner be drawne to like of the religion that made them such whereas the contrary would have bin manifestly a scandall and grievous impeachment to the propagation of the Gospell and defamed it for a doctrine of contumacy and disobedience and for a seminary as it were of disturbance and sedition of families and common-wealths And not onely alienated the affections of masters from their Christian servants but inflamed all men with indignation and hatred against the Christian religion and the Professors of it Such therefore evidently is the importance and intendment of the Apostles doctrine as unpartiall men whom prejudice or selfe conceipt leads not away may soone discerne very farre differing from this doctrine of yours Touching which point of the Apostles instruction given to servants for this effectuall and generall obedience you will not reply I hope as some have done that at first indeede it was permitted for the good of the Church lest the increase of it and proceeding of the Gospell should be hindred by offence given to the Gentiles For would that have beene permitted if it had beene unlawfull Or could the Church of God bee increased by the sinnes of men His Church increased by that whereby himselfe was dishonoured Or would the Apostles have permitted men to sinne as now Iesuites do for the good of the Church nay exhorted and commanded to it who had himselfe expresly taught that wee must not doe evill that good may come of it No neither of both can bee because either of both were a staine and derogation to the righteousnesse of God the intention therefore of the Apostles was simple without all trickes of policie to teach servants all exact and entire obedience to their masters touching all workes that belong to the dutie of servants namely that were in themselves honest and lawfull without excepting of any day Answer First here you would prove your Tenet for servants obedience to their masters commands for worke on the Lords day even worke prohibited to bee more agreeable to the Apostles Doctrine than the contrary and to this end you alledge Texts to prove their obedience in al things to all masters at all times and thence conclude the answerablenesse of yours the unanswerablenesse of ours thereunto First object that you bring no proofe of Scripture to confirme this your universall obedience at all times viz. on the Sabbath day though you should have done it especially the doctrine of the Commandement touching cessation of worke lying so fully upon the servant If you reply that there is no exception of time I answer there is exception of obedience to unlawfull commands and such are workes otherwise lawfull enjoyned to bee done on the Sabbath and so we have equivalent exceptions to that of time Your ground therefore which you lay and say it is founded on Apostolike truth namely that Apostles permit servants no point of libertie but command them obedience without exception of master of labour or of time we thus impugne The Apostles Doctrine touching servants obedience doth admit of three limitations by themselves expressed First it must be an obedience in the Lord n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scholia that is according to the will of the Lord in all things in which godlinesse may not be overthrowne in all things provided that we admit of nothing against the Lord. If the masters covenant should crosse the covenant of the servant as he is a man and Christian to his God it is sinfull in the making if such should be made and worse in the keeping and alwayes voide ipso facto The ground of this limitation is this that all authoritie and superioritie is derived from God and subordinate to him therefore the command of an inferior power binds not to obedience when it is contrary to the precept of the superior power as Durand o Durand lib. 2. distinct 39. quaest 5. well noteth That therefore of Gregorie touching wives must bee held touching servants for ever p Sic placeat uxor voluntati conjugis ut non displiceat voluntati conditoris Let the wife so please the will of her husband that she doe not displease the Will of her Creator This limitation excepts the servants labour in servile worke on the Sabbath or Lords day Secondly it must bee an obedience wherein they abide with God in their service that is in the observation of the Commandements of God saith the ordinarie Glosse q Glossa interlin and saith Lyra r 1 Cor. 7. 20 24 Lyra. as farre as pertaines to those things which are not repugnant to the state of Faith thus also your doctrine is plainely condemned for God hath provided by his unchangeable Law that one day in seven the servants shall rest from their labour and with their master attend on God with whom there is neither master nor servant Thirdly yea but the master commands him to worke then otherwise indeede he ought not Nay the Apostles doctrine hath yet a third limitation That they be not the servants of men Vpon which place saith Chrysostome ſ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost tom 3. in 1 Cor. 7. 23. pag. 362. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. pag. 363. There are bounds set of God to servants and how farre they ought to keepe them this is also ordered by Law and they may not passe over them for when the master enjoyneth none of those things which are displeasing to God and disallowed hee ought to follow and obey but beyond this by no meanes for thus the servant is a free man And if thou yeeld any further although thou were free thou art become a slave This therefore he intimates saying bee yee not the servants of men And not farre after he briefly expounds it thus t Obey not men that command absurd things yea neither yeeld to their owne selves Are not these Commandements of the masters for servile worke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absurd and without place and footing in Gods Word are they not of things displeasing to God These these are the servants limits beyond which if hee passe hee is the servant of men even of mens humours and a very slave because hee